1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Basic Facts

This Court's reasoning is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this Court's reasoning is cited in accordance with the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Plaintiff

The instant accident involving the subrogation of the damage claim against the Defendant is an accident in which the part of the Defendant’s lease was set up due to electrical causes, such as the exhaustion of the electric wires installed within the leased part, and the damage occurred due to the defect in the installation and preservation of the structure within the leased part of the Defendant. As such, the Defendant is liable to compensate for the damage caused by the insured L, the insured as the tort under Article 750 of the Civil Act or as the owner and possessor of the structure under Article 758 of the Civil Act, as the owner and possessor of the structure under Article 758 of the Civil Act.

The Plaintiff acquired the damage claim against the Defendant within the scope of the insurance money to be paid in accordance with the insurer subrogation doctrine under Article 682 of the Commercial Act. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the indemnity amount of KRW 57,020,489 and the delay damages.

The Defendant asserting the subrogation of the damage claim that the lessor D has against the Defendant is liable for damages due to nonperformance of Article 390 of the Civil Act, on the ground that the fire in this case occurred and expanded due to the lessor’s failure to perform its duty of preservation and management by using the dangerous business place within the leased object, such as failing to install the minimum safety facilities and failing to assign workmen, etc., and as a result, the leased object was damaged or its obligation to return is impossible.

However, even if it is not so, the defendant is the owner of the business, but neglected the duty to prevent the danger and caused the fire of this case, and thus, the defendant is liable to compensate for damages incurred by the lessor D due to the defect in the installation or preservation of a structure pursuant to Article 758 of the Civil Code.

The Plaintiff is the Commercial Act.